Psychologists should bethink themselves before putting down the instinct of self-preservation as the cardinal instinct of an organic being. A living thing seeks above all to DISCHARGE its strength—life itself is WILL TO POWER; self-preservation is only one of the indirect and most frequent RESULTS thereof. In short, here, as everywhere else, let us beware of SUPERFLUOUS teleological principles!—one of which is the instinct of self-preservation (we owe it to Spinoza's inconsistency). It is thus, in effect, that method ordains, which must be essentially economy of principles.
Here, Nietzsche argues against the idea that survival-of-the-fittest (Darwin) is the driving force behind life. Instead, he argues that survival-of-the-fittest is only a consequence of a more fundamental force: the Will to Power. The Will to Power is a force by which one “discharges" ones "strength;” a living thing becoming powerful in way that it becomes itself.
In the English language, it is easy to perceive the word “power” as necessarily the domination over another. This is not what Nietzsche means by Will to Power. Instead, the Will to Power is more in tune with the idea of becoming oneself; a growth of one's own character and self.
One example that explicates Nietzsche's argument against survival-of-the-fittest is the following:
If a meteor were to hit the Earth, it is more likely humanity will perish than beetles. But if self-preservation were the fundamental aim, then one can argue humanity is "below" the beetle. But today, humanity clearly has more capacity for growth and opportunity than these bugs. Therefore, self-preservation cannot be the final aim. The final aim must be about maximizing power and growth, and it is only a consequence of this power that we, humans, are still alive.
To reply you need to sign in.